On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 03:59:22PM +0200, Abraham vd Merwe wrote:> Hi Andrea!> > > > > > In my swapless testing, I burnt HUGE amounts of CPU in flush_tlb_others().> > > > > So we're madly trying to swap pages out and finding that there's no swap> > > > > space. I beleive that when we find there's no swap left we should move> > > > > the page onto the active list so we don't keep rescanning it pointlessly.> > > > > > > > yes, however I think the swap-flood with no swap isn't a very> > > > interesting case to optimize.> > > > > > Running swapless is a valid configuration, and the kernel is doing> > > > I'm not saying it's not valid or non interesting.> > > > It's the mix "I'm running out of memory and I'm swapless" that is the> > case not interesting to optimize.> > > > If you're swapless it means you've enough memory and that you're not> > running out of swap. Otherwise _you_ (not the kernel) are wrong not> > having swap.> > The problem is that your VM is unnecesarily eating up memory and then wants> swap. That is unacceptable. Having 90% of your memory in buffers/cache and> then the OOM killer kicks in because nothing is free is what we're moaning> about.